WASHINGTON, D.C. – A top Microsoft executive reluctantly admitted that his company won the browser war with Netscape by bullying computer makers and Internet service providers into limiting distribution and promotion of the rival web browser.

On the defensive for much of his second day on the witness stand at the Microsoft antitrust trial, Paul Maritz conceded that in “certain, specific situations,” the software giant did enter into restrictive contract agreements with computer manufacturers to limit promotion of Netscape’s browser.

Maritz is Microsoft’s No. 3 executive and the highest-ranking executive expected to testify at the trial.

The potentially devastating admission came during a relentless cross-examination by government attorney David Boies, who asked six variations of the same question and was clearly on a mission not to give his company’s adversaries any new ammunition.

“Did you personally conclude that it was a desirable option for Microsoft to get companies to agree to limit their promotion of Netscape’s browser?” asked David Boies.

The exchange is potentially a key point in efforts to prove that Microsoft violated antitrust laws by trying to extend the dominance of its Windows operating system onto the World Wide Web by squashing Netscape.

Microsoft eventually won the browser war, the government charges in part, by illegally bundling its Internet Explorer browser with industry-dominant Windows and giving it away for free. Microsoft insists it was merely improving its product and says the two are now one entity.

For most of the day, Maritz engaged in a verbal fencing match with Boies, the Westchester-based antitrust lawyer who was trying to get Maritz to agree that Microsoft spent considerable time and resources trying to blow Netscape out of the water.

At one point after Boies rephrased yet another question, Microsoft Wall Street lawyer John Warden jumped to his feet, saying the witness had already answered the question.

But Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson, after thinking through the convoluted answer Maritz had just given, replied: “I don’t think he did. Overruled.”

At another point, Boies asked if Microsoft wanted to see Netscape’s stock price go down.

“I don’t recall that as a specific objective,” Maritz replied.

Boies then showed him a Dec. 8, 1995, article in the Seattle Times of a lunch during which a Microsoft financial officer was overheard telling Maritz that Netscape’s stock went down $30. Maritz openly expressed pleasure at the development and the other executive added, “That’s not good enough.”

“I don’t recall making that reply,” said a poker-faced Maritz.

Maritz also denied that the company made an effort to rewrite history in the face of mounting legal challenges from the government.

Boies showed Maritz e-mail, written four months before the Justice Department and 19 states filed antitrust lawsuits, ordering deletion of references to Microsoft’s Internet Explorer browser as a separate product from Windows 98, and ordering all employees to refer to a browser as “browsing technology.”